“For all the dreamers, our planet’s dream is not over yet.”
– Chrono Cross –

We lost the battle today.
But, it is not the last battle.
It is true that the current verdict is not favorable toward the leaders.
However, it is still not the end.
Remember the case of NUS professor who was involved in sex-for-grades case?
He was acquitted by the High Court.
I really think CHC leaders should appeal to High Court (assuming they have enough finance).
But for now, I guess they should really rest their mind and body.

Somehow I have the impression one of the jobs of prosecution is to throw insults after insults at the accused. These insults are then quoted by the mainstream media. The readers then get the impression at the accused are “liars” as prosecution calls. However, just because prosecution calls them “liars”, it does not mean the leaders are really “liars”. In the end, I guess the leaders themselves are already immune with such characterization. It is just not fair for the readers as they are led to believe these leaders are bad people.

Prosecution claimed the leaders misappropriated the building fund money. In what way was it misappropriation when building fund was invested through bonds?

Victory and good news for the leaders are on the way. 21, October, 2015. The date of their vindication. Stay tuned.

Prosecution claimed CHC was a victim of CBT. Seriously, that’s a bizarre claim. SC Sreenivasan pointed out before: none of the prosecution’s own witnesses even suspected church lost money. In other words, is there a victim? None at all. In fact, I absolutely am confident if any of the church board members had been asked to testify, none would have claimed CHC was a victim.

CHC leaders are winning as the prosecution seriously have no direct evidence. The best they do is simply to draw inference. But really, how accurate is an inference? Inference is like drawing a straight line between two points and insisting it must only be a straight line even though in reality these two points are part of a curve.

And so, the oral submission of the court case started.
According to a reliable source, the defense and prosecution interviewed the witnesses like an experiment.
Each came up with a hypothesis then conducted experiment based on the available evidences.
It is then a matter whether the judge has already made up his mind.